HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1989/03/02 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Thursday, March 2, 1989 Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members McCandliss,
Nader, Malcolm and Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Asmus, Acting
Community Development Director
Gustafson, Redevelopment Coordinator
Kassman, Agency Attorney Harron
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 2/16/89
MSUC (Moore/McCandliss) approve the minutes of 2/16/89 as
submitted. (The vote was 4-0; Member Nader abstained.)
2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
a. Letter of resignation from the Otay Valley Road
Project Area Committee - Jerry F. Kelly
MSUC (Cox/Moore) accept the letter of resignation and direct
staff to prepare a letter of appreciation.
CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3 through 8)
Items 3 and 8 were pulled from the Consent Calendar.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 4, 5, 6 AND 7 WERE OFFERED BY
CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by
unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION 999 APPROVING PRELIMINARY UTILITY RELOCATION
PLANS FOR THE E STREET/BAY BOULEVARD
FREEWAY ON- AND OFF-RAMP IMPROVEMENTS AND
AUTHORIZING LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING WITH
SDG&E
In May 1987, the Redevelopment Agency entered into an
agreement with CalTrans for the reconfiguration of the E
Street/Bay Boulevard southbound on- and off-ramp. As part
of that agreement the Agency agreed to provide relocation of
existing utilities where required. The report described the
utility work that needed to be done to implement the ramp
improvements. Phase One of the utility relocation work is
an above-ground project and is an interim measure to
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- March 2, 1989
accommodate CalTrans' schedule to reconstruct the freeway
ramps. Future undergrounding plans for all utilities
located north of E Street will continue to be pursued.
5. RESOLUTION 1000 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH BSI
CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR DESIGN ENGINEERING
SERVICES REQUIRED FOR THE STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON BAY BOULEVARD
FROM "G" STREET TO "J" STREET
Staff recently prepared an annual pre-qualified list of
design consultants. The list was established to eliminate
the need to request and evaluate several proposals for each
CIP project. Staff also prepared a prioritized list of CIP
projects to be designed by contract. A detailed report
regarding the pre-qualified list of public works consultants
and the project list was accepted and approved by Council on
January 17, 1989, per Resolution No. 13940. BSI
Consultants, Inc. is ranked second highest of the fourteen
consultants which responded to the request for statements of
qualification. Therefore, BSI was offered a contract to
design the second highest priority CIP project which is the
installation of missing street improvements along Bay
Boulevard from "G" Street to "J" Street.
6. RESOLUTION 1001 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH UNITED
ARTISTS AND DONALD W. CALLENDER, TRUSTEE
FOR THE DONALD W. CALLENDER FAMILY
TRUST, FOR REBATING POSSESSORY INTEREST
TAXES PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
FOR THE USE OF THE TOWN CENTRE PARKING
STRUCTURE
Early in 1988 the County determined that possessory interest
taxes were due from Centre City Associates, Ltd.-Commercial
(CCAL-C), Marie Callender's and United Artists Cinema for
use of the Town Centre parking structure. These included
normal assessments to 1988 and escape assessments for 1984
through 1987.
On July 19, 1988, the City and Agency agreed to reimburse
CCAL-C for possessory interest taxes subject to their appeal
to the San Diego County Assessment Appeal Board. In
December of 1988, the Appeals Board determined that there
was a possessory interest and established the value.
Subsequent to that decision, Marie Callender's and United
Artists requested that the City and Agency enter into
similar agreements with them rebating possessory interest
taxes paid to the County.
On January 13, 1989 the Agency directed staff not to further
appeal (to court) possessory interest taxes levied on CCAL-C
for 1984 and to withdraw administrative appeals for tax
years 1985 through 1988. Staff was also authorized to
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -3- March 2, 1989
prepare agreements with United Artists and Marie Callender's
for review by the Agency and the City Council.
7. RESOLUTION 1002 APPROVING A LOAN OF $36,460 TO THE
SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL JUSTICE
FACILITY FINANCING AGENCY TO FUND AND
UPDATE THE SOUTH BAY REGIONAL CENTER
MASTER PLAN
In June 1988, County voters approved a one-half of one
percent transactions and use tax for the purpose of funding
regional justice facilities. This tax was to be implemented
January 1, 1989. However, a challenge to the validity of
the imposition of the tax is currently being considered by a
California State Court. Until a judgment validating the tax
is rendered, the County is seeking loaned funds, interest
free, to begin planning of regional justice facilities.
This loan was approved in concept by the Redevelopment
Agency, January 19, 1989.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
9. REPORT: STATUS OF THE CHULA VISTA SHOPPING CENTER
The Chula Vista Shopping Center was essentially completed
and opened for business in October 1988. Landscaping and
site work has been completed. There still remains some
questions as to the condition of the surface and striping of
the parking lot, which remains to be fully accepted by the
Building and Housing Department. Sales and sales tax
revenues through June 1988 have met minimum levels pursuant
to the Disposition and Development Agreement with the Homart
Development Company.
Mr. Tom Gourguechon, Homart Development Company, was present
and gave a slide presentation of "before and after"
redevelopment pictures of the Center. He noted that the
Center was featured in the quarterly newsletter of Homart
Development Company.
Mr. Gourguechon reported that 70% of the tenant space is
operating. The Center is 80% leased. The Olive Garden
Restaurant will be going into the old Pacific Bell Building.
He further reported the year-end performance for the Center
averaged $195.00 per square foot in sales. Jewelry was the
best performer at 15% over the national average. Christmas
sales for existing tenants was up 40% over the previous
year. The performance of the Center has been increased over
50% on a square foot basis. Mr. Gourguechon also noted that
with the exception of the Vons/Osco building, all
asbestos/hazardous materials will have been removed from the
entire project by the end of the week.
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -4- March 2, 1989
Mr. Gourguechon distributed a list of tenants after
renovation showing both the new as well as the existing
tenants.
Member Moore asked if the City/Agency has any financial
interest in the Center at this time. Redevelopment
Coordinator Kassman explained that the Agency sold bonds in
the amount of approximately $7,100,000 and used the parking
lot for collateral. In order to use the parking lot for
collateral, the Agency leased the lot from Homart; there is
a sublease to the City and a sublease back to Homart for
operation and management. The City and the Agency are tied
into the chain of leasehold interest on the parking lot
strictly in order to sell the bonds.
10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None.
PULLED ITEM____~S
3. STATUS OF LEASE NEGOTIATIONS WITH SAN DIEGO SHIPBUILDING
& REPAIR, INC.
At the Agency meeting of January 19, 1989, the Agency, after
modification, approved a lease with San Diego Shipbuilding &
Repair, Inc. for the period February 1, 1989, through
January 31, 1990. At the Agency meeting of February 2,
1989, the Agency further modified that lease. As of this
meeting, Mr. Gurnee of San Diego Shipbuilding & Repair, Inc.
had not signed the lease due to objections to the
modifications made by the Agency. Therefore, San Diego
Shipbuilding & Repair, Inc. remained in occupancy of Agency
premises without a lease.
Member McCandliss referred to a letter received from Mr.
Gurnee dated February 27, 1989 which was distributed to
Agency members at this meeting. She stated the only element
in the letter that she would be willing to consider is the
extension of the lease for a longer period of time. She
believes the amount to be charged for rent is fair, the
penalties and the accelerated departure as outlined by the
Agency are also fair.
Acting Community Development Director Gustafson reported
there is an error in Section 32 of the lease agreement. It
refers to Section 28; it should read Section 29. Further,
one of the concerns Mr. Gurnee had expressed is that he had
the impression from the language in the lease that if he
were to exercise his 90 day option to leave early, that he
would be charged the $1,000 per day liquidated damages from
the point at which he had left until the end of the year
lease. The language is intended to suggest that if he stays
after the year lease he would be charged the $1,000 per day
liquidated damages. If he gave a 90 day notice to leave
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -5- March 2, 1989
early, but stayed beyond the 90th day, then he would be
charged the $1,000 per day liquidated damages.
Mr. Ted Gurnee was present and stated that the explanation
given by Mr. Gustafson is still different from what he
understood. He believes he should not be penalized after
giving the 90 day notice. He suggested that he will clarify
this issue outside of this meeting.
Member McCandliss commented that her major concern is that
the Agency will have possession of the property when it is
needed. If Mr. Gurnee gives a 90-day notice, it is expected
that he will have vacated the property in 90 days. If not,
there will be a penalty. If a one year lease is agreed upon
or a two year lease, at the end of that period, San Diego
Shipbuilding will be expected to leave, if not the penalty
will take place.
Mr. Gurnee requested that the Agency consider extending the
lease to a two-year period. Member Nader suggested an 18
month period. Member Malcolm noted he would not have a
problem in extending the lease for two years.
Member Moore stated his concern as being similar to that
stated by Ms. McCandliss. He does not want the Agency to be
prevented from moving forward with the Bayfront development
because of this lease. He does not have a problem with the
lease being extended to 18 months or two years.
Mr. Gustafson reported the lease expired January 31, 1989.
Mr. Gurnee attempted to tender rent for the month of
February to the Agency at the rate of the previous lea. se;
however, the payment was not accepted because it would have
extended the expired lease for another year.
Chairman Cox commented he does not have a problem with
extending the lease for 18 months. However, he noted there
needs to be a realization on the part of all parties that
this will be the end of the lease (there will be no future
extension). At the end of the 18 month period, he would
like to see San Diego Shipbuilding come up with an
alternative location. Staff has been given direction to
work with San Diego Shipbuilding in locating an alternative
site.
MOTION
MS (Malcolm/Nader) extend the lease for an 18 month period
and prepare a letter for Mr. Gurnee clarifying the penalty
question.
Member Malcolm clarified the lease will be for an 18 month
period beginning March 1, 1989. The month of February, 1989
is to be paid at the previous rate.
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -6- March 2, 1989
Member Moore stated he wanted it on the record that the
Agency did not solicit this contract.
Responding to Chairman Cox' question regarding liability or
obligation on the part of the Agency to pay relocation
expenses, Agency Attorney Harron stated San Diego
Shipbuilding leased the property after the Agency acquired
the property. Therefore, no relocation benefits will be
provided to San Diego Shipbuilding. Chairman Cox asked Mr.
Gurnee if it was his understanding from a legal standpoint
that he would not be entitled to relocation benefits and Mr.
Gurnee acknowledged that he understood this.
The motion passed unanimously.
MOTION
MSUC (Malcolm/mccandliss) that if the lease is not
negotiated and signed within a ten day period (ten days
after receipt of modified lease from the Agency), the Agency
Attorney will start eviction proceedings.
8. RESOLUTION 1003 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH M.R. FARRELL &
ASSOCIATES FOR NEGOTIATING SERVICES
RELATED TO THE EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION
AGREEMENT WITH CHULA VISTA AUTO CENTER,
INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AN AUTO SALES
PARK AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
The Agency is engaged in an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
with Chula Vista Auto Center, Inc. to develop an auto sales
park on Otay Valley Road, east of Interstate 805.
Consultants have been employed by the Agency to appraise
property values, assess environmental conditions of the
properties, draft legal documents, and analyze the economic
feasibility of the proposed development versus the
alternative of industrial development of the site. Further
assistance is needed with the analysis of data and with
direct negotiation. Proposals were solicited from firms
having experience with auto sales park development. It was
recommended that the Agency approve an agreement with M.R.
Farrell & Associates for this purpose.
Member McCandliss asked at what point there would be a
public hearing on either the development of this plan or the
Disposition and Development Agreement. Mr. Gustafson stated
it would be at the point at which the Environmental Impact
Report is prepared for adoption, approximately the beginning
of September, 1989.
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent.
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -7- March 2, 1989
Member Nader stated he has a concern that the pros and cons
of commercial use versus industrial use is still being
evaluated. By approving this contract, it appears the
Agency is moving ahead toward negotiating an agreement. To
pay for this type of work seems premature at a point before
any public hearings and any formal input from the Project
Area Committee has occurred. Mr. Gustafson stated this is
one of the reasons that as part of the agreement the work
will proceed at $5,000 increments to be approved by the
Executive Director. The consultant's report that compares
the industrial use and the auto park use is expected in the
near future. If at that point it looked inappropriate to
move forward with the project, then the Agency would not
have to continue with this particular agreement.
The resolution passed and was aDproved unanimously.
11. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None.
12. CHAIR/~AN'S REPORT:
Chairman Cox pointed out problems with the crosswalks in the
downtown area. Tape has been used to mark the crosswalks
which has shifted and broken apart. Assistant City Manager
Asmus stated this situation will be looked into.
13. MEMBERS' COMMENTS:
Member Nader referred to a letter from Peter Watry of
Crossroads dated March 2, 1989 which was distributed to
Agency members at this meeting. This letter was concerning
the proposed Bayfront development by Chula Vista
Investors(William Barkett). One point of concern in the
letter is that Mr. Barkett is at the point of investing in
an Environmental Impact Report on the plan presented to the
Agency. Member Nader stated he believes it is the Agency's
intent that there be substantial further communication
between the Agency, the Agency Subcommittee, staff and Mr.
Barkett before a final project is decided upon. He is
concerned that Mr. Barkett may be in a position of believing
that the Agency has given its approval to the plan at this
point.
Mr. Gustafson stated staff has been encouraging Mr. Barkett
to undertake an EIR that looked at other alternatives in
detail (i.e., reduction in density, additional open space,
etc.). He is disinterested in doing that.
Member Nader pointed out that a Subcommittee meeting has
recently been scheduled with staff. After that meeting, a
Subcommittee meeting will be arranged to include Mr.
Barkett. At that point a workshop session will be arranged
with the entire Agency and Chula Vista Investors. He wants
to be sure this has been communicated to Mr. Barkett. Mr.
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -8- March 2, 1989
Asmus stated that if this has not occurred, it will be done
on March 3, 1989.
Member McCandliss commented that the reason she called for
the workshop on this matter is so that the Agency can be
very direct with Mr. Barkett and make sure that he does
understand what the Agency likes and does not like about the
plan.
Member Malcolm reported on the problems associated with the
recent fire/hazardous waste incident at Appropriate
Technologies II located on Maxwell Road. (1) Appropriate
Technologies did not call for outside help for two hours.
(2) Fire hydrant (it only produces 20 gallons per minute
versus several thousand gallons per minute from any other
fire hydrant in the City). (3) Appropriate Technologies
was uncooperative with regard to contacting the County
authority dealing with hazardous materials. (4) They have
volatile materials there without 24 hour guards.
Responding to Member Nader's questions, Deputy City Manager
Morris stated Appropriate Technologies has agreed to stop
shipments of hazardous waste with the exception of two.
They will continue with the contract that they have with the
Drug Enforcement Agency as well as some household hazardous
waste; other than that they have discontinued all other
contracts voluntarily. Member Nader stated he would like to
know if hazardous waste is being accepted from outside of
the local regional area. Mr. Morris stated he will report
back on this at the next City Council meeting.
Member Moore noted concerns with skateboarding in areas of
the City. Specifically, he has noticed abuse by
skateboarders at Memorial Bowl, the Library fountain area,
and City Hall. He suggested signage needs to be put up on
the City property regarding the ordinance pertaining to
skateboarding, or perhaps information on the ordinance
should be included in the City's quarterly newsletter to the
public.
Member Malcolm informed the Agency that SDG&E will be filing
with all the appropriate agencies to expand the Chula Vista
power plant and to increase its operation.
MOTION
MS (Nader/Malcolm) referral to the City Attorney for a
report to come back on any ordinances that could be adopted
that would prohibit polluting activity within the Coastal
Zone particularly in terms of expansion of a fuel burning
plant; to require discretionary permits before the Council
to the maximum extent possible.
Redevelopment Agency Minutes -9- March 2, 1989
Mr. Harron stated at this point he would like to prepare a
generic ordinance that would state any building permit
involving power plants shall be subject to a public hearing
and review for potential air pollution problems/nuisances.
If SDG&E does come forward with plans to expand the power
plant, then he would suggest consulting with appropriate
experts in the field to prepare a more specific ordinance.
Mr. Nader stated this would be adequate for his concern with
the proviso that the City require a permit on everything
possible regarding this matter.
The motion passed unanimously.
Chairman Cox referred to an information item in the agenda
packet for this meeting regarding the Town Centre Local
Development Corporation. It was noted that this item should
be placed on a future agenda as a report; a Council
Conference will not be required.
ADJOURNMENT at 8:45 p.m. to Closed Session to discuss the
potential acquisition of property located at: 354 Church
Avenue (Miguel A. & Fernandez A. Cardenas, owners) and 275 F
Street (F Street Corporation, owner).
ADJOURNMENT from Closed Session at 9:10 p.m. to the regular
meeting of March 16, 1989 at 4:00 p.m.
D~d ~uStafson
A~ting~Community Development
Director